The former chief justice of the state Trial Court has been tapped to lead a panel that reviews possibly wrongful convictions in Suffolk County, authorities said.
Jeffrey A. Locke, who led the Massachusetts Trial Court between January 2022 and December 2023, has been appointed to serve as chief of the prosecutor’s Integrity Review Bureau, Suffolk District Attorney Kevin R. Hayden said.
The bureau looks at potentially tainted convictions, examining “credible” claims of innocence along with “other circumstances that may have produced an improper judicial result,” prosecutors said in a statement issued last week.
Before leading the state Trial Court, Locke served as a Superior Court judge since 2001. He presided over several high-profile trials in that capacity, including the 2017 double murder trial of Aaron Hernandez in Suffolk Superior Court.
In January 2022, Locke rejected a request from three public safety unions to block the enforcement of Mayor Michelle Wu’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
“I think that the public health emergency now is of such a nature that it outweighs competing claims of harm by the plaintiffs,” Locke said from the bench in Suffolk Superior Court.
In 2018, he accepted a guilty plea from Robert Iacoviello Jr. in the fatal 2007 shooting of Daniel Talbot, an off-duty Revere police officer. Iacoviello pleaded guilty to manslaughter after an appellate court tossed his murder conviction, ruling that jurors should have been given instructions about self-defense.
When Iacoviello’s lawyer told the court that he hoped all parties could move forward after the manslaughter plea, Locke replied, “Everyone but Dan Talbot.”
During a closely watched bench trial in 2017, Locke acquitted three former prison guards at Bridgewater State Hospital who had been charged with involuntary manslaughter for their alleged roles in the 2009 death of Joshua K. Messier, a patient with schizophrenia they forcibly strapped to a bed in a brutal scene captured on prison video.
“Retrospectively, the conduct of these three defendants left much to be desired, but does not constitute wanton and reckless conduct,” Locke said.
He added that the video footage was “of insufficient quality and clarity to permit a full understanding of Joshua’s movements and position at critical times” and that the state Department of Correction had revamped its training and “put mental health professionals rather than correctional officers in charge of operations at Bridgewater.”
Locke retired in 2023.
He was previously the commissioner of the state Department of Social Services, now called the Department of Children and Families, from April 1999 to October 2001. He was the district attorney in Norfolk County from 1997 to 1999.
“I am honored to be entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring that criminal convictions in Suffolk County have been justly obtained,” Locke said in the statement. “I look forward to working with District Attorney Hayden and his talented team.”
Hayden, meanwhile, offered praise for the retired jurist.
“Judge Locke’s impeccable record of fairness and impartiality, combined with his deep knowledge of the law and trial procedures, give him an ideal skill set to lead the IRB,” Hayden said. “He has a balanced perspective that comes from many years of giving all sides equal consideration, with favor only to facts and evidence.”
Former Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley, in 2004, created the office’s Conviction Integrity Panel, which served as the precursor to the Integrity Review Bureau launched by Hayden’s predecessor, Rachael Rollins, officials said.
While the bureau investigates cases and makes recommendations, “the final decision about whether to grant [a defendant] relief, as well as what kind of relief, rests with the District Attorney,” according to the office’s website. “Any final decision for relief by the District Attorney would then need to be approved by the relevant trial court.”
The bureau recommends relief, such as a nullified conviction or release from prison, if it discovers “strongly persuasive evidence that a defendant was convicted of an offense that the defendant did not commit, that the defendant was wrongfully convicted, i.e., that an error, errors, or newly discovered or available evidence makes the defendant’s conviction unreliable, or that the defendant’s conviction or sentence is not in the interests of justice," the site says.
Travis Andersen can be reached at travis.andersen@globe.com.